| [00:01] <calc> Mirv: if you can please file a bug (if it doesn't exist) targeted to 8.04.1 to update voikko | |
| [00:02] <slangasek> s/targeted to 8.04.1/targeted to the hardy release/ | |
| [00:02] <calc> slangasek: oh ok | |
| [00:03] <slangasek> well - in this case, probably both | |
| [00:03] <slangasek> but target it to the hardy release first :) | |
| [00:31] <wgrant> Uh, why is there a private bug referenced in the -intel changelog? | |
| [00:32] <cjwatson> nothing wrong with referencing private bugs from changelogs as such - what use are private bugs if you can never fix them? :-) | |
| [00:32] <wgrant> cjwatson: What use is referencing bugs in changelogs if people can't look at them? | |
| [00:32] <cjwatson> I assume it relates to hardware whose existence or codename or whatever isn't public yet | |
| [00:33] <cjwatson> it's useful for those people who do have access to the bugs to have a record of when they were fixed | |
| [00:33] <cjwatson> bug references are as much for archaeology as anything else | |
| [00:33] <wgrant> I guess, but I don't like this idea of SRUs happening completely in secret, with no information even after they occur and break everybody's systems. | |
| [00:33] <cjwatson> for an SRU, I think there ought to be a public counterpart bug | |
| [00:34] <cjwatson> with whatever information can be disclosed | |
| [00:34] <wgrant> Right, people might actually want to see what this change is doing to all of their systems. | |
| [00:34] <cjwatson> I still see no reason not to reference the private bug as well - you're no worse off than if the changelog hadn't referred to it at all | |
| [00:35] <wgrant> If there was a public one as well, that would be OK. | |
| [00:35] <cjwatson> though the changelog is fairly descriptive otherwise | |
| [00:35] <cjwatson> bryce: ^- just to draw your attention to the above conversation | |
| [00:36] <bryce> cjwatson: thanks | |
| [00:37] <cjwatson> in fact looking at it the changelog is almost more descriptive than the bug report in most ways ;-) | |
| [00:37] <cjwatson> (though there is legitimately private stuff in the report) | |
| [00:37] <bryce> yeah | |
| [00:37] <wgrant> But we're not to know that. | |
| [00:37] <cjwatson> indeed | |
| [00:38] <bryce> yeah I've been rather torn on how to handle these kinds of bugs | |
| [00:38] <bryce> so would welcome advice | |
| [00:38] <cjwatson> for intrepid, I'm not sure it's a big deal | |
| [00:38] <cjwatson> for SRUs, I think a public counterpart bug is probably a good compromise | |
| [00:38] <wgrant> For Intrepid, sure, people won't be wanting to watch every bug for every update. | |
| [00:39] <cjwatson> we used to do that for SRUs much more commonly - we'd file a new bug just for the SRU request | |
| [00:39] <cjwatson> nowadays we tend to reuse the original bug | |
| [00:39] <cjwatson> but for this case, we could go back to the older fashion | |
| [00:39] <bryce> I've gotten scolded for filing new bugs just for putting in sru's ... which is why I didn't do it in this case | |
| [00:39] <cjwatson> it's generally a waste of bug numbers :-) | |
| [00:39] <wgrant> bryce: This is a rather different case. | |
| [00:39] <bryce> (and time) | |
| [00:39] <wgrant> cjwatson: And it splits the useful information away from the SRU bug where users would look. | |
| [00:40] <cjwatson> indeed | |
| [00:40] <cjwatson> another reason to have a separate public report is so that the SRU verification team can see it without having to expose private information to them | |
| [00:41] <cjwatson> note that not all the sru-verification members are Canonical staff and so they are not subject to NDAs | |
| [00:41] <bryce> in this case it was a bit annoying in that I'd gotten the patch outside launchpad, and specifically asked them to file a bug as a necessary step to getting an sru | |
| [00:41] <bryce> so they finally did... but marked it private and a security issue (which I removed) | |
| [00:42] <slangasek> heh, win | |
| [00:42] <slangasek> :-) | |
| [00:42] <wgrant> bryce: One cannot file a private non-security bug. | |
| [00:42] <kees> much to my sadness | |
| [00:42] <wgrant> Poor security team :( | |
| [00:43] <kees> and one can't unsub ubuntu-security unless you're a member of it. | |
| [00:43] <bryce> eesh | |
| [00:43] <kees> but I'm used to identifying them and unsub'ing myself | |
| [00:43] <bryce> and if you file a public bug and then mark it private, it auto-subs two dozen people | |
| [00:43] <kees> yup | |
| [00:43] <bryce> ah, well at least now I've learned how to file private bugs from the start | |
| [00:44] <wgrant> bryce: It doesn't autosub anybody... | |
| [00:44] <cjwatson> bryce: auto-sub is sort of irrelevant there though, if you file public and then mark as private | |
| [00:44] <sistpoty> wgrant: hm? what about apport bugs? aren't these private by default? | |
| [00:44] <cjwatson> (or "also notified" or whatever) | |
| [00:44] <cjwatson> bryce: if you file a public bug, it sends bugmail out to a public mailing list :-) | |
| [00:44] <wgrant> bryce: Only explicit subscriptions are used in a private bug - implicit subscriptions are excluded. | |
| [00:44] <wgrant> sistpoty: I'm not sure how it does that. Not through the main web UI, at any rate. | |
| [00:44] <bryce> cjwatson: well I couldn't see any other mechanism for filing private bugs | |
| [00:44] <sistpoty> wgrant: heh, k | |
| [00:45] <cjwatson> bryce: right, I'm just explaining why making the subscription behave differently wouldn't help | |
| [00:45] <cjwatson> can't unsend the mail when you mark it private ;-) | |
| [00:46] <cjwatson> (and yeah, I'd seen the earlier conversation along the same lines) | |
| [00:46] <wgrant> cjwatson: LP normally batches bugmail 5-minutely. Does marking it private in the first 5 minutes not do it? | |
| [00:46] <cjwatson> wgrant: it might do, I wouldn't like to swear to it. For example is it every five minutes by cron or five minutes from each action? Not something I've ever bothered to verify | |
| [00:46] <bryce> it might be nice for further discussion... but really my complaint is just that it's not obvious how to file a private bug | |
| [00:47] <cjwatson> plus what if your ADSL line decides to die at that point? | |
| [00:47] <cjwatson> bryce: I agree; kiko seemed amenable to doing something about that | |
| [00:47] <cjwatson> but I have it on my list to raise for Launchpad planning purposes anyway | |
| [00:47] <bryce> at least I know the workaround though (not that I file many private bugs - first one ever was just the other day) | |
| [00:48] <wgrant> Bug #121859 | |
| [00:48] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 121859 in malone "RFE: Url for posting private, non-security bugs" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/121859 | |
| [00:51] <bryce> cjwatson: so for future reference with private sru's, I should post a new public bug with the private info redacted? | |
| [00:52] <bryce> I've let the reporter know that they should post sru bugs public in the future, since I expect we may be getting more like this from them. | |
| [00:52] <cjwatson> bryce: I think that's the best option for the time being; maybe remind me on Monday to talk about it with pitti and we'll get the policy adjusted | |
| [00:52] <cjwatson> public> but of course not demanding that they post private information in public :-) | |
| [00:53] <bryce> yeah, also because I may not be a good judge of what info exactly is to be considered private | |
| [00:56] <slangasek> kirkland: looks like grub FTBFS now in intrepid, on amd64 only; could you try to reproduce this when you have a chance? | |
| [01:01] <calc> isn't google calendar supposed to be read/write in hardy now? | |
| [01:01] <calc> er inside evolution | |
| [01:16] <Daviey> calc: works in with opensync | |
| [01:17] <Daviey> calc: Bug #197972 was the problem before | |
| [01:17] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 197972 in libopensync-plugin-google-calendar "Doesn't handle recurring events in google cal" [Undecided,Fix released] https://launchpad.net/bugs/197972 | |
| [01:18] <Daviey> or _a_ problem at least | |
| [01:20] <slangasek> well, evolution also knows about 'google' as a calendar type, not using opensync; I guess that's what calc refers to | |
| [01:23] <Daviey> my bad.. I don't use evo very often. | |
| [01:58] <Amaranth> http://www.ubuntu.com/getubuntu/download is broken, not sure where to report this | |
| [02:02] <wgrant> Amaranth: Bug on ubuntu-website in general, but this is probably a bit too important. | |
| [02:03] <Amaranth> i mean, it'll still download, but only from releases.ubuntu.com | |
| [02:03] <Amaranth> which can mess with people's quotas and generally cause slow downs | |
| [02:04] <wgrant> And it looks awful. | |
| [02:04] <Amaranth> that too | |
| === iceman-away is now known as iceman | |
| === asac_ is now known as asac | |
| [08:06] <Erick> anyone in here? | |
| [08:06] <Hobbsee> Erick: no | |
| [08:07] <Erick> Hobbsee hey i have a question i've been actived. on the launchpad.net for ubuntu how do i become part of the Project? | |
| [08:07] <Erick> I am a translater | |
| [08:07] <Hobbsee> Erick: #launchpad knows the details on translations, i think. | |
| [08:07] <Hobbsee> but it is a weekend, so i'm not sure who's around | |
| [08:22] <arthur-> pitti: I will have a look, thanks | |
| [08:23] <andrew_sayers> Would I get laughed out of launchpad for requesting that by default, openssh-server only allow password logins from users with a ~/.ssh/allow_passwords file? | |
| [08:24] <andrew_sayers> i.e. making password authentication contingent on an educated user choice, independent of administrators. | |
| [08:25] <Hobbsee> andrew_sayers: ask cjwatson sometime during european working hours. | |
| [08:26] <andrew_sayers> Yeah, I guess I should have dreamed the idea up yesterday :) | |
| === elky is now known as elkbuntu | |
| [09:11] <cjwatson> andrew_sayers: not laughed out as such. I think something like that might be a useful feature, but I don't think it'd be appropriate for a default; too many sysadmins bootstrap new accounts using password auth | |
| [09:12] <andrew_sayers> cjwatson: Couldn't they put something in /etc/skel then? | |
| [09:12] <cjwatson> I'm sure they could but it would be another way in which Debian/Ubuntu deviated from upstream thereby causing confusion and requests for help (which I expect I'd have to field) | |
| [09:13] <cjwatson> I just don't think it's an appropriate default | |
| [09:13] <andrew_sayers> Hmm, fair enough. So should I submit a feature request, and if so, where? | |
| [09:14] <cjwatson> perhaps file a bug on bugzilla.mindrot.org (upstream) asking for the basic feature of allowing users to turn password auth on or off for their own account | |
| [09:14] <andrew_sayers> Okay, will do. | |
| [09:14] <andrew_sayers> Incidentally, is there any way of making one username an alias for another in sshd_config? | |
| [09:14] <cjwatson> and presumably you mean without disabling *local* password auth? | |
| [09:15] <cjwatson> because if you want that too, just give the account no password | |
| [09:15] <cjwatson> (a locked password, I mean) | |
| [09:15] <andrew_sayers> Yeah, I'm thinking about clueless users installing SSHD then getting dictionary-attacked. | |
| [09:16] <andrew_sayers> Basically a way for users to enable/disable PasswordAuthentication for their own account. | |
| [09:17] <cjwatson> I don't think there's a way to alias users, no. Feels like something you should use PAM for | |
| [09:17] <andrew_sayers> Hmm, okay. | |
| [09:20] <andrew_sayers> I'm still working on a remote help assistant, and the solution I've come up with seems pretty secure to me, except that it increases the probability that helpers will set up bad ssh servers. | |
| [09:21] <andrew_sayers> Right, last suggestion on the topic: when installing openssh-server after installation-time, how about asking whether to allow password auth? | |
| [09:21] <andrew_sayers> (which I assume it doesn't right now) | |
| === hunger_t is now known as hunger | |
| [09:52] <kestaz> ReschedulingInterrupts.. any success to fix ? | |
| [09:54] <Mirv> calc: done, bug #236248 , I guess I don't have other rights besides nominating for hardy | |
| [09:54] <ubottu> Launchpad bug 236248 in openoffice.org-voikko "Rebuild openoffice.org-voikko for the 2.4.1 upload of openoffice.org" [Undecided,New] https://launchpad.net/bugs/236248 | |
| [09:55] <Mirv> (I should probably join the bugs team) | |
| === gordon is now known as Guest15137 | |
| === gnomefre1k is now known as gnomefreak | |
| [10:13] <asac> Mirv: could you please test and comment on 219655 ... thanks! | |
| [10:25] <Mirv> asac: yep, tested on two machines and seems to be great now | |
| [10:30] <asac> Mirv: thanks. please keep using it ;) | |
| [10:30] <asac> Mirv: there was another bug about finish URLs not working properly. you remember that? | |
| [10:31] <asac> finnish | |
| [10:31] <asac> ;) | |
| [10:31] <asac> Mirv: its 221376 | |
| [10:31] <asac> do you still see that? | |
| [10:37] <Mirv> asac: yes, that one is still there. apparently the problem is that with language pack disabled search bar calls google search, but with language pack enabled it just tries to load www.[typedtext].com | |
| [10:38] <Mirv> I'm not sure but I don't think there's anything specifically related to scandinavian letters like stated in the bug report, since it does the same (does not google search) for any text I type in the location bar | |
| [10:40] <asac> wierd | |
| [10:41] <Mirv> disabling xulrunner translation doesn't change anything, but apparently something in the firefox translation disables google search from location bar | |
| [10:42] <asac> Mirv: could you post your thoughts to the bug? they sound promissing and might help to find the real problem | |
| [10:43] <Mirv> yeah, I posted already something | |
| [10:45] <Mirv> changed now also the description | |
| [10:52] <asac> Mirv: ok i reassigned it to new (non-gnome) package as well. | |
| === fta_ is now known as fta | |
| [12:22] <renegade444> Hi, I apologize for asking here, but nobody in #ubuntu was able to give me an answer, and I thought someone here might be more likely to know the answer. I'm trying to find a guide to making ubuntu-specific binary .deb packages from source, but I can only find a guide for 6.10 on help.ubuntu.com. My question is: Does that guide fully apply to 8.04? If not is there an 8.04 guide out there I just can't find? | |
| [12:25] <jpds> !packguide | renegade444 | |
| [12:25] <jpds> gah, bot down | |
| [12:25] <bimberi> renegade444: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PackagingGuide/Complete | |
| [12:25] * bimberi is not a bot btw ;) | |
| [12:25] <renegade444> ahh, perfect, thank you very much! | |
| [12:47] <RicardoPerez> pitti: has you received my email about firefox problems in proposed langpacks? | |
| [13:04] <math_b> Hi, I'm trying to package something which provide a python library, should I use pycentral or pysupport ? | |
| [13:10] <Festor> math_b, #ubuntu-motu | |
| [13:11] <math_b> Festor: thanls | |
| [13:50] <garnm> hi | |
| [13:50] <garnm> does ubuntu have a recovery option? | |
| [13:50] <garnm> its not universe and multiverse deb is it | |
| [13:51] <Festor> recovery option = recovery mode? | |
| [13:51] <garnm> yes | |
| [13:52] <Festor> then yes | |
| [13:52] <jpds> garnm: it's in grub when you boot | |
| [13:52] <garnm> oh thanks a bunch | |
| [13:53] <garnm> is it in grub? | |
| [13:53] <garnm> ok you guys cant be wrong here | |
| [13:54] <jpds> garnm: when you boot, press "Esc" and it's in the menu | |
| [13:55] <garnm> gotcha | |
| [13:55] <garnm> thanks, sorry | |
| === [20]_Cent is now known as zwanzigcent | |
| [17:45] <sistpoty> hm... what build target does LP actually invoke? (as this one puzzles me, since build-depends-indep weren't installed, but only the indep part actually needs them, which gets somehow invoked: http://launchpadlibrarian.net/14622202/buildlog_ubuntu-intrepid-amd64.hs-plugins_1.2-1_FAILEDTOBUILD.txt.gz | |
| === Hobbsee is now known as Guest78382 | |
| [18:31] <qaws> hi, do you know LTS has broken dependencies? (at least for my language) | |
| [18:35] <persia> qaws: There are likely quite a few. These are best encoded as bugs. If you have fixes, that would be welcome. Be sure to nominate for your release as they likely qualify for a stable release update. | |
| === blueyed_ is now known as blueyed | |
| [22:49] <emgent> heya | |
| === smarter_ is now known as smarter | |
| === J-Unit is now known as jdong | |
| [23:28] <jelmer> info | |
| [23:33] <calc> anyone know what happened to cinepaint? it seemed to be removed from hardy? | |
| [23:33] <calc> was it replaced by something else? | |
| [23:43] * danshearer is away: Zzzz | |
| [23:52] <wgrant> calc: IIRC there is no replacement, and it was removed for being a dead, buggy thing. | |
| [23:52] * wgrant checks. | |
| [23:52] <wgrant> '(From Debian) RoM ; obsolete, buggy, unmaintained, being abandoned upstream' | |
| [23:53] <ion_> danshearer: Thanks a lot for the information! | |
| [23:54] <ion_> A future version of Gimp will use GEGL and thus support >8-bit colorspace. | |
| [23:54] <wgrant> calc: Seems it was partly because it was a GTK1 rdepend, but there is now a GTK2 version so it may be making a reappearance. | |
| [23:54] <wgrant> ion_: That's happening RSN, isn't it? | |
| [23:55] <ion_> wgrant: AFAIK they’re been hacking the development branch of Gimp to use it for a while now. | |
| [23:55] <ion_> So, the next major Gimp release probably has it. | |
| [23:56] <Lightkey> 2.5 has been released already | |
| [23:56] <Lightkey> err, 2.5.0 | |
| [23:57] <ion_> Oh, neat. | |
| [23:58] <wgrant> ion_: That's what I thought. | |